They take turns
2007-03-03 11:30:53
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
that's awful to call anybody the anti Christ. that's way too harsh!! and how can she be the down fall to the U. S. while she isn't even president yet? i do no longer accept as true with alot of her regulations, extraordinarily her face on the conceal of one of the biggest corporation magazines obtainable. It exhibits that she is a finished supporter of the previous asserting "people who've money have potential". She additionally has stated some somewhat undesirable issues, like while Melissa Ethridge suggested the actuality that the gay/lesbian community have been "thrown decrease than the bus" with the help of the final Clinton administration and he or she could no longer provide a directly answer. She wavers on critiques alot, and would not look to attracted to such issues as a results of fact the unemployment expenses, (she tries to assert she is for wellbeing care reform yet all of us understand that the huge companies that help her and fund her are not for that). She never talks approximately immigration issues, she not often addresses the difficulty of the practise gadget it fairly is falling aside real until now our eyes. She maximum definatley would not care related to the poverty right here in our own u . s . a .. What approximately crime and the overflowing prision gadget? i do no longer think of she fairly addresses the matters that truly hassle the yank public. that's dazzling to finally see a woman interior the working for president, yet, all of us understand that once it comes time for persons to bypass into their deepest little balloting cubicles, that maximum adult men (and probable alot of politically sensible women) won't vote for her. yet why could anybody accuse anybody of being the anti Christ is so a techniques obtainable i don't get it. She is an fairly non secular woman and in that component she would not deserve that slam. in case you decide directly to understand who's in charge for the down falling of the U. S. i think of you could desire to look to the guy who's place of work real now. he's the huge baller and shot caller, no longer Hillary.
2016-10-02 08:07:45
·
answer #2
·
answered by cavallo 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
If you really want to find out then don't vote for either of them! I mean if you think that one of those two might cause mass destruction all over the world or whatever then just not give them the power to start with. Who is Nancy Pelosi?
2007-03-03 08:11:22
·
answer #3
·
answered by Emily E 2
·
0⤊
2⤋
Hitlery Clinton by a landslide. Though, her right hand woman is Pelosi. And her left hand man (Bill) has his right hand up Nancy's skirt.....
"Well gee Hillary, that depends on what the defintion of the word 'Fingerbang' is."
2007-03-03 08:07:12
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Um, neither. There is no such thing as the anti-Christ, until it presents itself. By dogma true beleivers will know the rest will follow. If you don't know then you're damned anyways blah blah blah, so on and so forth.
You can't present two choices and for such a specific question. And you should probably at least have the real anti-Christ as a choice.
2007-03-03 08:05:22
·
answer #5
·
answered by TheRebel 1
·
1⤊
3⤋
Neither. Dick Cheney, Alan Greenspan, or the current Mexican government and/or plus the current president of Mexico.
2007-03-03 08:40:15
·
answer #6
·
answered by Cenaposermobile3254 2
·
0⤊
2⤋
Anna Nicole's MOTHER
2007-03-03 08:04:11
·
answer #7
·
answered by nick 1
·
1⤊
2⤋
How quaint... thinking of an Anti-Christ will destroy the world... beliving what some old cook wrote down when he was bored... How very ammusing.
2007-03-03 08:06:12
·
answer #8
·
answered by StreetPunk 2
·
1⤊
3⤋
Let me go off of the board on this one alex and say George Bush.
2007-03-03 08:04:50
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
4⤋
Neither... It's George W. Bush.
2007-03-03 08:01:59
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
4⤋